Arbi�ng

Ma�ers Too

Newsle�er of the Chess Arbiters Associa�on

January 2016 Issue 12

Editorial

Belated seasons gree�ngs.

I’m typing this during the Has�ngs Con-

gress. The good news is that the spon-

sorship from Tradewise Insurance has

allowed the Masters event to con�nue.

Ge$ng sponsorship for chess events is

not easy. Ge$ng adequate media cover-

age is almost impossible. Carlsen’s

appearance on the BBC One Show did

not receive overwhelming support

from chess players some of whom

thought it was superficial. However, the fact that it was on prime �me TV must be

seen as a bonus for chess.

The PokerStars Interna�onal held in the Isle of Man was the first “Bri�sh” event to

be visited by FIDE’s An�-Chea�ng team. There is a report on the procedures inside.

On that topic the first punishment under FIDE’s revised code has been published.

The recipient received a three year ban and the loss of his GM �tle rever�ng to IM

status. (See page 6). Perhaps strangely he is prevented from ac�ng as an arbiter

but can con�nue to teach chess to children. Is it appropriate that his punishment

should allow him to be able to influence young players? It might be seen as ex-

tremely harsh to totally prevent him from trying to make a living from chess but

wouldn’t his ac�ons mean that he was unsuitable to promote the game to young-

sters. Imagine the press reac�on if a Premiership footballer convicted of match

fixing was allowed to coach a team of school kids during his suspension!

Bah! Humbug!

A seasonal message from a well known chess player.

(I may have the wrong Roger de C here.)

2

What Is The Correct Extra Queen Posi�on?

Events in St Louis seem to a�ract controversy. We’ve already had the So misuse of

the scoresheet incident. This �me it was the “Showdown in St Louis” between Ca-

ruana and Nakamura and blitz game 5.

The incident can be seen here at 2:42:40 for the live version (or 2:59:00 for the dou-

ble replay).

h�ps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FnPtAYXAvrc

In a�emp�ng to promote Caruana reached for a queen and seems to have accident-

ly started his clock with the pawn having been moved to the promo�on square. If

this had been judged by the arbiter to have been deliberate then he would have

been deemed to have made an illegal move and forfeited his blitz game.

The story has raised concerns about the new DGT 3000 clocks with some claims that

the rocker arm can be moved too easily. Arbiters may wish, as a result, to consider

where the extra queens should be placed when se$ng up for the start of a round.

It is quite common for the extra pieces to be put behind the clock as this is easily

reached and was thought not to interfere. If this is s�ll the case it might be advisa-

ble for players to reach for the queen before moving the pawn.

One chess club I visited solved the problem by removing the extra queens from all

of their new sets and keeping them as spares in the club’s cupboard.

CASTLING

The following game was played in the recent 2015 European Championship in Rey-

kjavik.

White: GM Anton Korobov (UKR) Black: GM

Dragan Solak (TUR)

1. d4 d5 2. c4 c6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. Nc3 dc4 5. a4 Bf5

6. Ne5 Nbd7 7. Nc4 Nb6 8. Ne5 a5 9. h4 Nbd7

10. Qb3 Ne5 11. de5 Nd7 12. e4 Be6 13. Qb7 Ne5

14. Bf4 Rb8 15. Qa6 Ra8 16. Qe2 Qb8 17. h5 Nd3

18. Qd3 Qf4 19. g3 Qd6 20. Qe3 Qb4 21. Bg2 Bc4

22. e5

22 … 0-0-0 was played. Moves 14 and 15 may

explain why this was a problem. Black resigned

rather than con�nue with another king move.

3

It might surprise how many top players do not know or forget the Laws on castling

as the following show.

Carlos Torre Repe�o v Richard Re� (1925

Baden Baden)

1. e4 Nf6 2. e5 Nd5 3. Nc3 Nxc3 4. dxc3 Nc6

5. Nf3 d6 6. Bb5 a6 7. Bxc6+ bxc6 8. Bf4 Rb8

9. b3 e6 10. Qd3 d5 11. O-O Qd7 12. Rad1 a5

13. Rfe1 Ra8 14. Ng5 h6 15. Nh3 Ba6 16. Qg3

g6 17. Be3 Be7 18. Nf4 c5 19. f3 Qc6 20. c4

d4 21. Bf2 Bb7 22. a4 0-0-0 was a�empted.

The queen rook has already moved. Castling

kingside remains a possibility but 22 … Nxg6

was a problem. So the game con�nued …

22 … Kf8 23. Rd3 Kg7 24. Nh5+ Kh7 25. Qf4 Rhf8 26. Nf6+ Bxf6 27. Qxf6 g5 28. Bg3

Rg8 29. Qxf7+ Rg7 30. Qh5 Rf8 31. h3 ½–½

Alexander Kotov v Boris Spassky (1958 USSR

Championship)

In the posi�on shown Kotov a�empted 28 0-

0-0!

1. c4 Nf6 2. Nc3 g6 3. d4 Bg7 4. e4 d6 5. f3 O-

O 6. Be3 e5 7.d5 c5 8. g4 Ne8 9. h4 a6 10.

Bd3 b5 11. Qd2 bc4 12. Bc4 Nd7 13.h5 Nb6

14. Bd3 a5 15. hg6 fg6 16. Qh2 Nf6 17. Nh3

Qe7 18. Ne2 Rb8 19. Ng3 c4 20. Bc2 Nbd5

21. ed5 Rb2 22. Ng5 h6 23. N5e4 Nd5 24.

Bh6 Nb4 25. Bg5 Qc7 26. Qh7 Kf7 27. Rh6

Nc2 And here 28. 0-0-0

28. Kf1 Nd4 29. Qg6 Kg8 30. Qh7 Kf7 31. Nd6 Qd6 32. Rd6 Ne6 33. Nf5 Rh8 34. Nh6 1

-0

Stefan Kindermann v Victor Korchnoi (1995 Ptuj)

1e4 c6 2d4 d5 3e5 c5 4dxc5 e6 5Be3 Nd7 6Bb5 Qc7 7Nf3 Bxc5 8Bxc5 Qxc5 9Nc3 Ne7

10O-O a6 11Bd3 h6 12Re1 Nc6 13Qd2 g5 14h3 Rg8 15a3 Qf8 16g4 h5 17Qe3 Qh6

18Bf1 hxg4 19hxg4 b6 20Bg2 Bb7 21Na4 Rh8 22Nxb6 Ncxe5 23Nxd7 Nxd7 24Rad1

Rc8 25Qa7 Rc7 26Rd3 This is officially where the game ended but in reality and in a

�me scramble Korchnoi played 0-0 and the game con�nued un�l both flags were

4

down at move 47. In a�emp�ng to reconstruct it

was discovered that 26 … 0-0 was illegal as the

rook had already moved. Both players agreed to a

draw rather than endure another �me scramble.

And finally, no illegal move this �me but Black’s

move 14 was ques�oned by White.

Yuri Averbakh v Cecil Purdy (1960 Australian

Championship)

1. c4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. cxd5 Nxd5 4. g3 Nxc3 5.

bxc3 c5 6. Bg2 Nc6 7. Rb1 e5 8. Qa4 Qc7 9. Bxc6+

Qxc6 10. Qxc6+ bxc6 11. Nf3 f6 12. d3 c4 13. dxc4 Be6 14. Nd2 O-O-O 15. Nb3 Bxc4

16. Be3 Rd7 17. f3 Be7 18. Kf2 c5 19. Na5 Ba6 20. Nc6 Bd6 21. Rhd1 Kc7 22. Nxa7

Ra8 23. Nb5+ Bxb5 24. Rxb5 Kc6 25. Rb2 Rda7 26. Rdb1 Rxa2 27. Rb6+ Kc7 28. Rb7+

Kc8 29. Rxg7 R8a7 30. Rxa7 Rxa7 31. Rb5 Rc7 32. c4 Kd7 33. Ra5 Kc6 34. Ra6+ Kd7

35. g4 Rb7 36. h4 Rb4 37. Ra7+ Ke6 38. Rxh7 Rxc4 39. h5 Ra4 40. Rh8 Ra7 41. h6 Rc7

42. h7 Kd5 43. Bd2 Rd7 44. Ba5 c4 45. e4+ Kd4 46. Rd8 Rxh7 47. Rxd6+ Kc5 48. Rxf6

1-0. Averbakh ques�oned the legality of Purdy's 14th

move. Of course it is legal but

even such a strong player wondered if the rook could move across a 'check'.

ANTI CHEATING INSPECTION

The FIDE An�-Chea�ng Commi�ee (it’s not yet a Commission) held an inspec�on at

the Isle of Man PokerStars Interna�onal. David Welch fills us in on what was in-

volved.

Currently visits by the ACC only happen in events where they will be welcomed. It is

therefore known in advance that the visit will take place. However this will not al-

ways be the case once the ACC opera�on is in full swing.

For the players the visible evidence of the ACC presence was the random checks by

a hand held scanner. This was done using a metal detector familiar to those going

through security at airports and other sports events. In addi�on some games were

checked using the soVware which will become available to chief arbiters and at

least one game went through the more stringent soVware. For the normal soVware

checks results were known within a day. The more thorough check would actually

require an overnight run on the computer.

It is good to report that nothing suspicious was found. David reports that the play-

ers seemed to welcome the fact that measures were being used to deter chea�ng.

5

No-one refused to be scanned. Had there been such a refusal then the player would

not have been allowed to con�nue. Apparently one player even asked to be

scanned.

Other than the scanning the IoM event did li�le above the normal. It was comment-

ed on that the various FIDE categories of event and the security measures suggested

for them did not fit easily into the Bri�sh chess circuit.

An example of something which would be difficult to enforce at a Bri�sh event

would be the exclusive use of toilet facili�es for players.

The An�-Chea�ng Commi�ee gave the tournament a Garre� Super Scanner V which

is hand held and used at a number of spor�ng events worldwide.

It seems like players and arbiters will need to get used to the idea of security

checks. In addi�on to the metal detectors we may soon have to use detectors

which will establish if a mobile phone is being used. If an accusa�on is made then

6

the player should do so in wri�ng. The accuser should be aware that false acusa-

�ons may not result in ac�on being taken against themselves but that malicious

accusa�ons almost certainly will.

There would appear to be li�le truth in the rumour that the next new crea�on in

the long running crime drama series will be CSI Has�ngs with the CSI standing for

Chess Standards Inves�gated. (Theme tune—Shakin’ All Over by the Who)

Illegal Moves

I’ve been involved in correspondence recently about what cons�tutes an illegal

move.

The first case seems reasonably straight forward the second less so.

In a bit of a �me scramble in a Glasgow League Division 1 game White promotes her

pawn to a black queen and presses the clock. Is this an illegal move?

Unfortunately I don’t think there is much doubt that it is.

In a rapidplay in the Midlands a player touches a piece, doesn’t move it however

and then stars the opponent’s clock. Is this an illegal move?

This is the case where there could be some uncertainty. Can not moving be classi-

fied as an illegal move?

It seems to me that there are three situa�ons where a player starts the opponent’s

clock without moving.

• The player misses his opponent moving and thinks he has failed to stop his

clock aVer his previous move,

• The player moves but realises it would be a mistake and moves the piece

back to its original square but presses the clock,

• The player is in zugswang and is trying to cheat.

I have experience of the first two but not the third that I am aware of. The first case

is different in that no piece was touched. In the second situa�on I’ve had players

genuinely think they had moved, failing to realise it was back on the same square.

The third is clearly chea�ng and should be punished but should that punishment be

by trea�ng it as an illegal move? Comments welcome as I will be returning to this

one.

7

FIDE DECISION CONCERNING CHEATING AT DUBAI OPEN

The FIDE Ethics Commission has announced its findings in the case of GM Gaioz Ni-

galidze in the 2015 Dubai Open. The Commission states that he was guilty of analys-

ing using a chess engine installed on his I-pod in his round 6 game against GM Petro-

sian. He therefore violated sec�on 2.2.5 of the FIDE Code of Ethics. His punishment

is a ban un�l 5th September2018 from playing rated chess, ac�ng as an arbiter or

organiser or represen�ng a chess federa�on. His GM �tle was also revoked. During

his ban he will be allowed to con�nue as a trainer, teacher or coach.

The three year ban is the maximum allowed for a first offence. While his GM �tle

was removed he will retain IM status because of his remorse and coopera�on.

This case is significant for being the first case of chea�ng being decided since FIDE’s

establishment of an An�-Chea�ng Commi�ee and its adop�on of an�-chea�ng

guidelines and amendment of the Code of Ethics to provide for much increased

sanc�ons in November 2014.

FIDE has s�ll to reveal the outcome of its inves�ga�on of the false accusa�ons made

at the infamous women’s event where what have subsequently been shown to be

false accusa�ons of chea�ng were levelled at one of the compe�tors.

Requirements for FIDE Ra�ng

A few people have asked ques�ons recently about the requirements for a FIDE rated

event.

Can the FIDE Laws be amended for the event? No a FIDE rated event must follow

the FIDE Laws though these do allow a bit of flexibility in how, for example, mobile

phones are dealt with.

Can I use any arbiters? All arbiters must be licenced by FIDE. FIDE itself has no re-

stric�on on who may be licenced but na�onal federa�ons do.

Can I use any �me control? Although there is no longer only 6 recognised �me con-

trols for �tled events all FIDE rated events must sa�sfy certain condi�ons. If there is

a first �me control this must use 40 moves. Each player must have the following

minimum period in which to complete all the moves, assuming the game lasts 60

moves. Where at least one of the players in the tournament has a ra�ng 2200 or

higher, each player must have a minimum of 120 minutes. Where at least one of the

players in the tournament has a ra�ng 1600 or higher, each player must have a mini-

mum of 90 minutes. Where all the players in the tournament are rated below 1600,

each player must have a minimum of 60 minutes.

8

Can I use any pairing system? Currently the answer to that is a restricted yes. If a

standard system is not being used then a copy of the rules used should be sub-

mi�ed. You would not be allowed to use a system which favours any player. It is

not allowed to change a pairing (or to ar�ficially make one) which would increase

a players chances of ge$ng a �tle norm for example. From 2017 any system used

for norm events must be approved by FIDE. SoVware will then be used to check

that no altera�ons were made to the draw aVer the first round (it is accepted that

round 1 pairings will change due to late entries etc).

Can I repair if a player doesn’t turn up? Yes, but only with the agreement of the

players concerned. A player can decline the opportunity to be re-paired.

Can I avoid pairing family members or clubmates? Technically, provided you have

published the pairing rules to be used (and supply FIDE with a copy) you can try to

avoid such pairings. However, I do not believe that the Qualifica�ons Commission

in FIDE has yet had to rule on such a situa�on. I would be concerned that if, for

example, a player was the top seed and his brother did not have to play him then

it could be argued strongly that the brother had an unfair advantage over the oth-

er compe�tors which would mean that the event should not be rated. FIDE is

known to ignore this itself in some events where Arabs and Israelis have been kept

apart.

THE START OF THE SWISS SYSTEM

Compe��ve chess un�l the late 19th Century consisted of matches or all-play-all

tournaments. (Club tournaments and some others organised as APAs tended to

have provision for games not being played by insis�ng that the prizewinners had

to have completed a minimum number of games. It was therefore not uncommon

for the person who scored most points not to be given a prize.)

It is generally accepted that the first Swiss event was the 1895 Swiss Champion-

ship held in Zurich. The inventor being Julius Müller from Brugg near Zurich.

However it is unlikely that many would recognise that event and the next few as a

Swiss in the modern sense. The pairing method was such that winners from the

previous round were paired together as were the losers. If a game was drawn it

was decided by lot if a player was put into the winning half or the losing one.

Points were not totalled un�l aVer the last round. This system was used un�l the

1899 Championship in Lausanne when the rules were changed to pair people with

the same number of points. Those who drew were s�ll allocated by lot to a full

point score. The St Gallen tournament of 1901 was the first to document that the

actual score was the sole criterion for pairing.

9

This informa�on can be checked in the Swiss Chess Player (Schweizerische

Schachzeitung). It therefore seems more reasonable to claim that the first chess

Swiss was held in 1899. It is also alleged that the ‘Swiss system’ was used in Go

tournaments at an earlier date. Addi�onally it is unclear if players were allowed to

meet for a second �me, a system now known as the Danish. The Danish can be

used to allow the leading teams/players to meet in later rounds even if they had

met earlier.

Julius Müller was born in 1857. By profession he was a meteorologist and teacher in

Brugg (not far from Zurich). He was a founding member of the Swiss Chess Federa-

�on in 1889, and a member of the commi�ee and then treasurer un�l 1903, when

he was elected an honorary member. He died in 1917.

Arbi�ng Mistakes?

A player is asleep at the board.

There is a suspicion that the

player has been drinking.

What should the arbiter do?

This scenario occurred in 2009

at the 4th Kolkata Grandmaster

Open when GM Vladislav

Tkachiev, one of the top seeds

fell asleep at the board during

his round three game. It is

alleged that the player was

somewhat the worse from an

overindulgence in intoxica�ng

liquor. The arbiter woke the

player, an ac�on that produced

much cri�cism. Accusa�ons

were made against the arbiter

Anantharam Rathinam that his

ac�ons had effec�vely given advice to the player or were showing favouri�sm and

were contrary to the law which states that you cannot tell a player that it is his

move. He was also accused of allowing other players to do the same. It would ap-

pear that the player was awoken with only minutes remaining on his clock.

The arbiter countered that he had to ensure that the best condi�ons were upheld

and that the many players coming up to look at the GM was a distrac�on to those

on the surrounding boards. There could also have been the possibility that the play-

er was seriously ill and only appeared drunk. In this case it would appear that the

The above pieces are not recommended for tour-

nament play—especially if filled appropriately

before the start.

10

opponent had requested that the arbiter waken the player as he preferred to win

over the board rather than on �me.

Was the arbiter correct? Should he have waited a few more minutes un�l the

sleeper lost on �me? If there is any possibility of the problem being health related

then every minute could be vital and the arbiter must react accordingly.

At a Glasgow Congress in the 1980s a player was missing from his board for a con-

siderable �me. On his return he was somewhat unsteady on his feet. It transpires

that he had visited the pub across the road from the playing venue. The arbiter

had no hesita�on in awarding the game to the opponent.

I woke a player on one occasion to tell him that play had started. In my defence it

was 4am and we were well into an all night tournament.

RAPID TRANSIT CHESS?

Ever heard of this? I certainly hadn’t before searching through old newspaper

clippings. The Brooklyn Daily Eagle of 12 December 1895 gives the following ex-

plana�on. “… a quick tournament with a �me limit of 120 moves in an hour, or half

a minute to a move. This style of play is popularly known as rapid transit, or rail-

road chess, and affords a deligh#ul relief, par�cularly to spectators, from the nec-

essarily slow and arduous play usually seen … Here is where the player with the

clear brain and eagle eye, who calculates rapidly and makes his decisions prompt-

ly, has the advantage over his more methodical and analy�cal compe�tors. The

former sees at a glance what is required of him and does it without hesita�on,

while the la&er takes his 25 seconds to find out what is the object of his opponent,

when he is warned by the call of �me that he must play and, becoming flustered,

he makes a losing move or forfeits the game by overstepping the �me limit. It is

exceedingly good sport, however, alike for players and onlookers.”

Despite the original claim of being 120 moves in an hour this seems to be the

effect of accumula�on. It looks like there was someone with a watch who called

out a warning aVer 25 seconds and then awarded a loss 5 seconds later if the

move s�ll hadn’t been made.

Other Arbiters

Not many sports in Britain refer to the officials as arbiters but the term is used

elsewhere.

The Arbiter is a Gastropub in North End Road, Fulham. I am unaware of any chess

connec�on though being a gastropub that probably means that you pay the bill

with large checks (sorry!).

11

The Arbiter is a ceremonial, reli-

gious, and poli�cal rank be-

stowed upon alien Covenant

Elites in the Halo science fic�on

universe. Halo is described as a

military science fic�on first-

person shooter video game—so

now you know. Chess arbiters

may find that there are fewer

disputes if they dressed in the

uniform opposite.

The Arbiter is also the official

periodic journal of the Barking

and Dagenham (Football) Refer-

ees’ Society. It has been pub-

lished since 2006 and has a “You

are the Ref!” sec�on—a state-

ment I would have assumed ob-

vious from the target audience. This poses hypothe�cal situa�ons and asks what

you would do. Here is an example.

Q. A striker is on-side and clean through on goal when the goalkeeper decides to

try some diversionary tac�cs- turning his back on the striker and dropping his

shorts. Astonished by what he is seeing, the a�acker briefly hesitates and turns to

you in bewilderment. The keeper quickly pulls up his shorts and picks up the loose

ball. What do you do?

A. Dismiss the goalkeeper – he has clearly commi&ed a serious offence from which

his team have benefited, and, given the circumstances, his ac�ons have clearly de-

nied an obvious goal scoring opportunity, so he must be shown the red card. Have

the defending team choose someone else to go in goal and restart the game with an

indirect free kick from the point where he dropped his shorts.

Makes chess arbi�ng seem less stressful.

�������

12

Items for inclusion in future issues should be sent to Alex McFarlane

ahmcfarlane@yahoo.co.uk

BACK PAGE BRIEFS

In his 1561 trea�se on chess Ruy Lopez

de Segura (c. 1540- c. 1580) advised his

chess students to “place your opponent

with the sun in his eyes if you play by

day, and with the candle at his right side

if you play at night.”

In 1973, the police raided a chess tourna-

ment in Cleveland, Ohio. They arrested

the tournament director and confiscated

the chess sets on charges of allowing

gambling (cash prizes to winners) and

possession of gambling devices (the

chess sets).

The following is an adver�sement from

the “Australian Town and Country Jour-

nal” of 12th Sept 1896.

CAA Officials

Chairperson - Lara Barnes

Secretary - Alan Ruffle

Treasurer - Tony Corfe

Chief Arbiter - Alex McFarlane

Informa�on officer - Alex McFarlane

Commi�ee - David Welch, Kevin Staveley

and Neville Belinfante.

ECF Delegate - Neville Belinfante.

Chess Scotland Delegate - Alex McFalane

Welsh Chess Union Delegate - Kevin

Staveley

Independent Examiner - Richard Jones

FATTORINI CHESS CLOCK

———

THESE STANDARD TIMEKEEPERS Were used at the recent GREAT INTERNATIONAL

CHESS TOURNAMENT at Has�ngs

_______

They are recognised as the

OFFICIAL TIMING CLOCKS In all the Chess Masters’ Interna�onal and Na�onal

Tournaments; also, in Matches North v South of

England, and all important County and Club En-

gagements throughout Great Britain and Ireland

_______

Procurable only from

FAIRFAX AND ROBERTS

JEWELLERY SHOWROOMS

23 and 25 HUNTER STREET, SYDNEY

Price, 16s 6d each. Special Terms for Club Orders.

SOLE AGENTS FOR AUSTRALASIA

For those unfamiliar with predecimal

money that amounts to 82½p. The

clocks worked by a pendulum and were

halted by �pping the clock. An example

is shown below.